Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > War and Military History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

War and Military History War and Military History Forum - Warfare, Tactics, and Military Technology over the centuries


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old June 7th, 2012, 06:40 AM   #1

Naomasa298's Avatar
Bog of the Year
 
Joined: Apr 2010
From: T'Republic of Yorkshire
Posts: 20,740
Comparison of WW2 battleships


I would be interested in a comparison of the capabilities of the leading battleships of the various powers in WW2. I'm no naval expert, so looking to hear your thoughts.

The candidates would be, in my opinion:
USA: Iowa class
UK: King George V class
France: Richelieu class
Italy: Vittorio Veneto class
Japan: Yamato class
Naomasa298 is online now  
Remove Ads
Old June 7th, 2012, 06:49 AM   #2

bartieboy's Avatar
.
 
Joined: Dec 2010
From: The Netherlands
Posts: 6,529
Blog Entries: 5

Isn't it a bit a bit unfair to choose the king George and richelieu class against a ship like the Iowa that was build during the war when many lessons had been learned? I would find a confrontation between the USS Iowa very interesting
bartieboy is offline  
Old June 7th, 2012, 06:55 AM   #3

Naomasa298's Avatar
Bog of the Year
 
Joined: Apr 2010
From: T'Republic of Yorkshire
Posts: 20,740

Quote:
Originally Posted by bartieboy View Post
Isn't it a bit a bit unfair to choose the king George and richelieu class against a ship like the Iowa that was build during the war when many lessons had been learned? I would find a confrontation between the USS Iowa very interesting
Sure, but I'm limiting it to ships that saw active service during WW2. The only other candidate from the British perspective is HMS Vanguard, and I don't think there are any later designs from the French and Italians.
Naomasa298 is online now  
Old June 7th, 2012, 07:03 AM   #4

bil73's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 521

on another forum they compared all the characteristics of WW2 battleships and the Iowa class was by far the winner, but again it WAS developed later in the war
bil73 is offline  
Old June 7th, 2012, 07:57 AM   #5

diddyriddick's Avatar
Forum Curmudgeon
 
Joined: May 2009
From: A tiny hamlet in the Carolina Sandhills
Posts: 13,704

Quote:
Originally Posted by bil73 View Post
on another forum they compared all the characteristics of WW2 battleships and the Iowa class was by far the winner, but again it WAS developed later in the war
While not an expert on battleships, it is my understanding that the speed and superior fire control of the Iowas made it a peer of the vastly superior armor and armament of the Yamatos.
diddyriddick is online now  
Old June 7th, 2012, 08:00 AM   #6

Naomasa298's Avatar
Bog of the Year
 
Joined: Apr 2010
From: T'Republic of Yorkshire
Posts: 20,740

Quote:
Originally Posted by diddyriddick View Post
While not an expert on battleships, it is my understanding that the speed and superior fire control of the Iowas made it a peer of the vastly superior armor and armament of the Yamatos.
Wasn't the Yamato's armour much heavier than that of her contemporaries for the same protection because of Japan's inferior quality steel?
Naomasa298 is online now  
Old June 7th, 2012, 09:48 AM   #7
Suspended until August 22nd, 2014
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk.
Posts: 5,813

I'm no naval expert either, but surely the German Bismark class should be in their as well.
Bish is offline  
Old June 7th, 2012, 10:20 AM   #8

Frank81's Avatar
Guanarteme
 
Joined: Feb 2010
From: Canary Islands-Spain
Posts: 2,546

Loooove Yamato class, but I have to agree that due to technology Iowa class was superior, fire control system and radars on board of Iowas were too superior to that of Yamato.

But Yamato still had higher potential due to better armour and gunnery, in my opinion. I mean, if they were to use the same fire control system and radars, Yamato would win.
Frank81 is offline  
Old June 7th, 2012, 10:41 AM   #9

Naomasa298's Avatar
Bog of the Year
 
Joined: Apr 2010
From: T'Republic of Yorkshire
Posts: 20,740

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bish View Post
I'm no naval expert either, but surely the German Bismark class should be in their as well.
Whoops, I knew I'd forgotton something. Yes, Bismark class as well.
Naomasa298 is online now  
Old June 7th, 2012, 11:57 AM   #10
Archivist
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 164

Quote:
Originally Posted by Naomasa298 View Post
Wasn't the Yamato's armour much heavier than that of her contemporaries for the same protection because of Japan's inferior quality steel?
One reason Yamato never did much is how much fuel she consumed. She had
very think armor, the quality of which I'm not sure has ever been tested.

Why she never took part in the Japanese effort to re-capture Guadalcanal,
other than fuel consumption, I don't know. She was a symbol of Japan's
ability to build a huge battleship, as much as anything else. But, her 18 in
guns could have done a lot of damage if they had been used.
Cat Daddy is offline  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > War and Military History

Tags
battleships, comparison, ww2


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Battleships or Carriers for US in WW2 as capital ship Cat Daddy War and Military History 60 December 5th, 2012 04:32 PM
The Golden Age of Battleships Richard Stanbery War and Military History 78 June 27th, 2011 06:49 PM
Falsification or comparison, which is more suitable? coberst Philosophy, Political Science, and Sociology 0 April 9th, 2009 12:51 AM
IJS Akagi nd other japanese battleships Silverghost War and Military History 4 October 15th, 2008 01:54 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.